Or is it “Predict the next word, supposing what you are reading is a random-with-the-following-weights sample from dataset D? [where D is the dataset used to train GPT-3]
This is the correct answer.
The problem with these last two answers is that they make it undefined how well GPT-3 performs on the base objective on any prompt that wasn’t in D, which then rules out psuedo-alignment by definition.
This is correct, but non-problematic in my mind. If data wasn’t in the training dataset, then yes there is no fact of the matter as to what training signal GPT-3 received when training on it. We can talk about what training signal GPT-3 counterfactually would have received had it been trained on this data, but there is no answer to the question in the actual world.
Why do you choose answer 3 instead of answer 4? In some sense answer 3 is the random weights that the developers intended, but answer 4 is what actually happened.
I think that 4 is confused when people talk about “the GPT-3 training data.” If someone said “there are strings of words found in the GPT-3 training data that GPT-3 never saw” I would tell them that they don’t know what the words in that sentence mean. When an AI researcher speaks of “the GPT-3 training data” they are talking about the data that GPT-3 actually saw. There’s data that OpenAI collected which GPT-3 didn’t see, but that’s not what the words “the GPT-3 training data” refers to.
Ahhh, OK. Then perhaps I just was using inappropriate words; it sounds like what I meant to refer to by 4 was the same as what you meant to refer to by 3.
This is the correct answer.
This is correct, but non-problematic in my mind. If data wasn’t in the training dataset, then yes there is no fact of the matter as to what training signal GPT-3 received when training on it. We can talk about what training signal GPT-3 counterfactually would have received had it been trained on this data, but there is no answer to the question in the actual world.
Why do you choose answer 3 instead of answer 4? In some sense answer 3 is the random weights that the developers intended, but answer 4 is what actually happened.
I think that 4 is confused when people talk about “the GPT-3 training data.” If someone said “there are strings of words found in the GPT-3 training data that GPT-3 never saw” I would tell them that they don’t know what the words in that sentence mean. When an AI researcher speaks of “the GPT-3 training data” they are talking about the data that GPT-3 actually saw. There’s data that OpenAI collected which GPT-3 didn’t see, but that’s not what the words “the GPT-3 training data” refers to.
Ahhh, OK. Then perhaps I just was using inappropriate words; it sounds like what I meant to refer to by 4 was the same as what you meant to refer to by 3.